Rother District Council (23 021 173)

Category : Planning > Planning applications

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 09 Jun 2024

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council considered a planning application. We do not consider the complainant has suffered a significant personal injustice which warrants an investigation.

The complaint

  1. Mr X complains the Council failed to provide details of a planning appeals case to the public prior to introducing it as part of a planning committee debate on a planning application before granting planning permission.
  2. He says he was denied the right to inspect all documents referred to by planning officers.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. Mr X complained to the Council that it failed to ensure details of an appeal referenced in the planning officers report and referred to at a planning committee meeting were available for public view before the planning committee meeting.
  2. This refers to a planning officer telling the planning committee about the Council having to pay costs for a lost appeal which it considered was similar to a retrospective planning the committee was considering.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the reference to appeals and costs is common, and I do not consider the planning decision would have been any different if the exact planning appeal reference had been made available before the meeting. Nor do I consider Mr X has suffered a significant personal injustice which justifies an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings